No abstract

The SSRI antidepressants paroxetine, fluoxetine, and sertraline were similar in effectiveness for depressive symptoms as well as multiple domains of health-related quality of life over the entire 9 months of this trial.

The Osteosarcoma Surveillance Study, an ongoing 15-year surveillance study initiated in 2003, is a postmarketing commitment to the United States (US) Food and Drug Administration to evaluate a potential association between teriparatide, rhPTH(1–34), a recombinant human parathyroid hormone analog (self-injectable medication to treat osteoporosis), and development of osteosarcoma in response to a finding from preclinical (animal) studies. Incident cases of primary osteosarcoma diagnosed in adults (aged ≥40 years) on or after January 1, 2003, are identified through population-based state, regional, and comprehensive cancer center registries in the US. Information on possible prior treatment with teriparatide, on demographics, and on risk factors is ascertained by patient or proxy telephone interview after patient consent. Between June 2004 and September 30, 2011, 1448 cases (diagnosed 2003 to 2009) were identified by participating cancer registries (estimated to be 62% of all adult cases in the US for that time period); 549 patients or proxies were interviewed. Interviewed patients were similar to noninterviewed patients with regard to mean age, sex, race, and geographical distribution and tumor type and site of tumor. Mean age of those interviewed was 61 years, 46% were female, 86% were white, and 77% were alive when the case was reported to the study investigators. Data collected in the study provide descriptive information on a large number of adults with osteosarcoma, an uncommon malignant bone tumor. After 7 years of the study, there were no osteosarcoma patients who had a prior history of teriparatide treatment. Thus, approximately halfway through this 15-year study, the study has not detected a pattern indicative of a causal association between teriparatide treatment and osteosarcoma in humans. © 2012 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

A high proportion of patients with asthma seen in primary care settings are not well controlled. Recognition of specific predictors can signal who may be at higher risk of uncontrolled asthma and provide the opportunity for early interventions.

The BRAT Framework is a set of flexible processes and tools that provides a structured approach to pharmaceutical benefit-risk decision making in drug development and post approval settings. A work in progress, it consists of six steps that produce representations of key tradeoffs, with appropriate documentation of the rationale for decisions and the assumptions made in their development. This article describes insights, gained from case studies, into the Framework's performance in a variety of constructed benefit-risk scenarios, focusing on a hypothetical example of a triptan for migraine. The scenarios described illustrate the challenges inherent in arriving at many of the regulatory decisions, including obtaining data for matching populations for all outcomes, finding data of consistent quality, addressing correlated outcomes (e.g., elevated liver function tests and hepatitis rates), dealing with rare but serious adverse events (AEs), and understanding and making decisions based on information for many outcomes simultaneously. The Framework provides a structure for organizing, interpreting, and communicating relevant information, including heterogeneity in results and the quality and level of uncertainty of data, in order to facilitate benefit-risk decisions.